Re: CFQ v2 high cpu load fix(?)

[Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>]

On Tue, Oct 12 2004, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 12 2004, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >
> >>Ronny V. Vindenes wrote:
> >>
> >>>CFQ v2 is much better in a lot of cases, but certain situations trigger
> >>>a cpu load so high it starves the rest of the system thus completely
> >>>ruining the interactive experience. While casually looking at the
> >>>problem, I stumbled upon a patch by Arjan van de Ven sent to lkml on
> >>>sept. 1 (Subject: block fixes). Part of it is already included in the
> >>>CFQ v2 patches and after applying the rest[1] I'm no longer able to
> >>>trigger the problem.
> >>>
> >>>[1] Patch attached against 2.6.9-rc4-ck1 but applies to rc4-mm1 with
> >>>some minor fuzz.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>--- patches/linux-2.6.9-rc4-ck1/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c	2004-10-12 
> >>>12:25:09.798003278 +0200
> >>>+++ linux-2.6.9-rc4-ck1/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c	2004-10-12 
> >>>12:25:42.959479479 +0200
> >>>@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@
> >>>		nr = q->nr_requests;
> >>>	q->nr_congestion_on = nr;
> >>>
> >>>-	nr = q->nr_requests - (q->nr_requests / 8) - 1;
> >>>+	nr = q->nr_requests - (q->nr_requests / 8) - (q->nr_requests/16)- 1;
> >>>	if (nr < 1)
> >>>		nr = 1;
> >>>	q->nr_congestion_off = nr;
> >>
> >>
> >>I thought this first hunk looked like a good idea when Arjan sent the
> >>patch. Can you check if it alone helps your problem?
> >
> >
> >Yeah agree, it's a good idea to leave a bit of air between congestion on
> >and off. Fully explains the cfq v2 excessive sys time for some
> >workloads, which is extra nice.
> >
> 
> Cool. Can you queue up a patch for when -mm opens again, or shall I?
> I can't imagine it should cause any problems but a bit of testing
> would be wise.

Testing is always good, but maybe Andrew can take it now but just not
feed to Linus until after 2.6.9?

Jens